Tower of Babble (a bunch of baseless babble)

The good news is: somebody's actually reading the "back issues".

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

We Canadians are always making fun of the Americans. It's one way the little guy has of getting back at the big guy.

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

I notice you talk about "the" tower as if there was only one - or at least that one of them is more significant than the rest. But then you go on to the description of a different ziggurat.Since Mesopotamia is peppered with quite a few of these "towers", how is "the" Tower of Babel in any way distinct? If the Bible story is to be taken seriously, in a literal sense, how do you explain the plethora of other towers that the Bible fails to mention?

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

I suspect that the one in Babel was the only one mentioned, not because of "intensity" or "splendor" but because that was where the children of Israel were held captive. What do you mean by "precursor", exactly? Are you suggesting that those other "towers" were somehow influenced by the one in Babel? If memory serves, those other edifices were built for a variety of purposes, not all related to the "stairway to heaven" concept of the ziggurat. And don't some of them predate their alledged "precursor"? Maybe he was anticipating Horace Greeley's "Go west, young man."

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

A fundamentalist is somebody who twists the Bible to fit his preconceived notions - as you have done here. Would you like to discuss the topic point-by-point, with specific reference to Biblical accuracy?Welcome to EvC.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

First, take a look at the little "peek" button at the lower right-hand corner of every post. You can see how we do the quotes and smilies and other little fripperies.Now, shall we start our discussion at the logical place - the middle? This character, "Satan", that you mention... I don't see him in my copy of Genesis. Are you using some unusual translation? Or is this an example of what I have called "twisting the Bible for your own purposes"?Also, it seems odd to me that you talk about this Satan's "pathway to the destruction of all mankind". Wasn't it God who did destroy (almost) all mankind just two or three chapters earlier? Once again, that is not in my Bible, nor does it seem to have anything to do with the Tower of Bable and it's historicity.The OP suggests that the Tower of Babel story should not be taken literally. You seem to have delivered an irrelevant sermon instead of actually responding directly to any of the points. Can we dispense with adding characters, motivations, etc. and just deal with the subject at hand?(I noticed that you also mentioned something about "evolutionists". This topic has nothing to do with the subject of evolution. Nobody's stance on the subject of evolution has any relevance to this topic.)

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

If you start off with that premise, the discussion is going to become way too broad. Since these topics have a limited length (~300 posts), it would be best to limit your comments to the nearby context - i.e. Genesis. Well, all "mention" of the Deluge - at least all physical evidence of it - has been erased. There isn't any. But that's a different topic. Please stick to the Tower of Babel. There are plenty of other threads where you can discuss the flood. But mankind had already started out to do their own will back in the garden of Eden, when they ate from the tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. It was doing their own will that caused God to flood the earth.To paraphrase the question in the OP: What made the Tower of Babel special?ABE (Added by Edit ):I should also point out that this is a science forum, not a Bible study forum (you can find that a few inches down from here). Discussions here should be about the actual evidence for the Tower of Babel - not your interpretation of the Bible.This message has been edited by Ringo, 2006-03-03 08:57 AM

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

No. I perceive the need to get to the point. Only a hundred or so posts to go and you've still said little or nothing about the Tower of Babel. We constantly have people making that claim, but they never deliver. Please take it to an appropriate thread. The point of the thread would seem to be that the Tower of Babel was something "new" (according to the Biblical account), and therefore its story was worthy of inclusion in the Bible. We are trying to discuss what is special about the Tower - as opposed to the dozens of other ziggurats in Mesopotamia. This is not a discussion about the general condition of mankind. Sure, the Tower is authenic. So are dozens of others. Why that one specifically?And what is not historically authentic is the dispersion of peoples and the origin of languages. If you claim they are authentic, you must provide outside evidence. This is a science forum. But the Tower did exist. Nobody disputes that. If the specific ziggurat of Babylon has not been found (?), many others have been found.What you need scientific evidence for is the dispersion of peoples and the origin of langauges.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

But that document has not been authenticated. You need to provide outside evidence that it is authentic. (Yes, we have threads for that, too. ) No offense, but that's just silly. The nations exist, therefore any old story about them must be true? England exists, too, but does that make Alice's Adventures in Wonderland true? The scientific community has plenty of explanations, but they are - guess what - OFF TOPIC. The topic here is the BIBLE story of the Tower of Babel and how it can (or can not) be authenticated, BY SCIENTIFIC MEANS. That is the topic we are trying to guide you towards. No. For the purpose of this discussion, nobody is claiming that the Tower did not exist. Because other, similar towers do exist to this day, we have no reason to think that there wasn't one in Babylon.What we are questioning in this topic is what was different about that particular tower? Why did the building of that one particular tower provoke God to the point where He decided to disperse mankind to the ends of the earth and confound their languages? And - more important - where is the evidence that all peoples diverged from that single location in Mesopotamia (presumably 6000-odd years ago)? Where is the evidence that all languages developed from a single source at that same time? That doesn't matter here. We're looking for outside evidence here. Then provide the evidence which shows there is no contradiction. Once again, the topic is about the lack of outside corroborating evidence to confirm the historic authenticity of the Tower of Babel story.I am not required to convince you that the cupboard is bare. You are required to show us what is in the cupboard.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

*sigh*Joman,Science DOES have the explanations, but that is not the topic here.The Bible is NOT the only alternative, and even if it was IT IS NOT EVIDENCE.The only one avoiding scientific discussion is you.Nobody is required to show any alternative. You are required to show - as the topic demands - that the Bible story is authentic.If you can not do so, you are welcome to withdraw.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC